click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130211
20130219
STATION
MSNBC 7
MSNBCW 7
WHUT (Howard University Television) 4
CNN 3
CNNW 3
KQED (PBS) 2
WETA 2
KRCB (PBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 36
Search Results 0 to 35 of about 36 (some duplicates have been removed)
the fears of progressives as obama conducts a foreign policy that looks like bush's. i am not pro-drone. i am pro-destroying al qaeda. i am pro-protecting america. i am pro-a better drone program and i am pro ending this war as soon as we can but i fear that's a long way away. as douglas macarthur said, only the dead have seen the end of war, and we may now be in a permanent war. okay. that does it for "the cycle." martin, it's yours. >> passionate patriotism from toure. thank you. it's monday, february 11th, and a pope has abdicated, the president prepares to face the nation, but republicans are still stuck on benghazi. >> the president's state of the union address. could be the president's last best chance to address a captive audience. >> do republicans have the leverage now? >> none of the things i ran on as part of the tea party have been fixed. >> i don't want to live with this sequester. >> how do we get growth with jobs? >> no confirmation without information. >> are you going to support him for defense secretary? >> i will see the rest of the answers to his questions but certainly
back to the election" rather than the point of view he has about foreign policy. >> we don't agree on very much in terms of foreign policy. when i think about the national security team that led to my comment that i thought the president was making second-rate choices, that goes to things like hagel for defense, susan rice to state, brennan for c.i.a.. >> brennan worked closely, was in the c.i.a. >> john was around when we were there. he didn't play a prominent role. that's really developed since he joined this administration. >> rose: but there are -- >> but there are people that could be appoint as director of c.i.a. folks like steve cap pass. i don't know if you know him? >> rose: i know him very well. >> talented guy, enormously respected. >> rose: retired from the c.i.a.. >> he has retired. they brought him back once before, we did. with people of that caliber available, i'm surprised you end up going with somebody like brennan. i just -- i come back to the proposition that it looks to me-- and speculative on my part, obviously, i'm not in the meetings-- that the president has
, immigration, the environment, everything basically, but his lead on foreign policy is a staggering 14 points. what makes republicans think this is a good thing to have a fight over? >> right. up until recently everybody said, look, politics stops at the water's edge, and that hasn't been the case for the last couple years with this republican party. but it turns out that it wasn't necessarily that both parties followed that axiom because they were being nice about it. it turns out that it's incredibly bad politics to challenge your sitting president overseas. and, you know, this benghazi thing has not worked out for the republican party at all. they tried effectively to make it the biggest issue of the presidential campaign in the last several weeks, and people just didn't buy into it. what they saw is a tragedy. something that was -- if it could have been prevented, it should have been prevented, but they weren't going to start pointing blame and ask for the resignations of hillary clinton and throw barack obama out of office. >> right. >> and the idea that you'd be able to stop future cia
rice. there's a controversy. we have republicans who are in a weird position on foreign policy and national security precisely because the president has been so aggressive. in a lot of ways there's not a lot of daylight between what republicans do in the same position as democrats. unless we're bipartisan, there is a lot of people in particular, chuck hagel as defense secretary nominee, and there has been some talk by some in the gop leadership that they will filibuster his nomination. john mccain saying he won't. what is your read on all that many. >> i think it will be a very interesting move to filibuster. it will be a drastic move. wron if you guys saw, but carl livin said he will hold a vote on the nomination tomorrow, so they are moving ahead with it. my hunch is that they won't because i think deep down inside republican senators believe that a president does deserve to choose his advisors, and i think it sets a bad press debt because one day there will be a republican in the white house again. maybe not, i guess. the venom from republican senators towards chuck hagel is
foreign policy record. which is worse? >> i tell you one thing, i think boehner has his own internal problems and that he shouldn't run out there and get in the president's way because in doing that he's getting in the american people's way. i think it's time that people want to see us go above party and think in terms of our country. i think they're exhausted at the partisan politics and now is the time to rembuild america and moe forward. >> i thought it was speaker bain mother didn't have the guts to do a grand bargain deal with the president because he was frightened of eric cantor in 2011. now he's saying it's the president who doesn't have the guts. i mean, this is total revisionism, isn't it? >> well, you can see that boehner wants everyone to respond to the president, the tea party, the republican party. if there was a moderate part of the republican party, i guess there will be a chance to respond, too. i don't really think that boehner is speaking for the american people or the republicans for that matter. i think that he is trying to keep these primaries -- tea party prima
a serious discussion about foreign policy in defense during these nomination hearings. whether it's hagel or brennan or whatever. they're just taking cheap shots all over the place and they're not having a serious discussion. >> what -- >> in other words, if dick cheney wants to get in the ball game and have a really serious -- >> you raise this, i have to answer your question. what is the burr in lindsey graham's saddle? >> well -- >> why is he putting a hold on hagel? >> he's not going to put a hold on hagel. that's just -- he's just grabbing his ankles on the way out the door. hagel is going to be confirmed. it's a done deal. john mccain has blessed it. john mccain said he gave the committee enough -- said hagel gave the committee enough information i'm not going to hold him up on benghazi. i think lindsey graham is there to be the last annoying guy to make sure that hagel keeps whatever promises he made behind the scenes -- >> howard, does this -- >> to carl levin and -- >> the cisco kid may have handed 9 okay but poncho is still fighting the war. thank you, howard and joan. >>> miche
talk about foreign policy, it's a direct impact on the department of defense and these are exact questions we should be asking. >> heather: and this is not unprecedented. there are two other times that a cabinet secretary needed 60 votes and both of those bush nominees facing harry reid and democrats and environmental agency head. both had to meet 60 vote threshold. now it has happened to hagel. the third time in ten years. so it's not unprecedented. my question to you, why rush it? >> because the department of defense is responsible for our military. we are currently in conflict right now. i think this is something that has to deal with national security. you really need to get serious and get to work here. we can't be talking about things that are not relevant. they are asking for information about benghazi and chuck hagel had nothing to do with benghazi. if you wanted questions about that you need to talk on other people. >> heather: they got one of those questions answered, that is whether or not president obama himself personally called libyan officials on the night of septe
, had choice words for the president's foreign policy team. i'm not sure i agree with that. in "the new york times," a great must-read, quietly killing a consumer watchdog. it's how the republicans are just doing everything they can not to have the consumer financial protection bureau that was created by elizabeth warren under president obama actually function because it would keep them, quite frankly, from being able to get their money from all their donors on wall street. and they do not want to lose the people who helped them out. so they want to make sure that the consumer suffers so that they can gain politically. it's a good one. take a look at it. coming up -- >> we're also going to talk about nancy pelosi saying we don't have a spending problem, and the problem with medicare is not medicare. we've got a lot to talk about straight ahead. >> gail collins of "the new york times" joins us straight ahead. >> she's got a great column. >> i love it. you're watching "morning joe" brewed by starbucks. humans. even when we cross our t's and dot our i's, we still run into problems. namely,
editor for foreign policy magazine. a lot of sources in the pentagon and he just wrote this about chuck hagel, quote, his big problem is that tho one much wants him running the pentagon. the prospect is a real problem now because the next secretary of defense will need to work with congress to reduce the defense budget and work with the military to reshape it to make it relevant for future conflict. at the moment, he appears to lack the political capital and the intellect yul appetite to do the latter. do you think chuck hagel can run the pentagon? >> my inclination has been to give the president the prerogative of deciding who's in his cabinet. i voted for john kerry although i don't agree with much he represents as far as a u.s. senator, but i think he's an honest person and i think the president has the right to decide. with regard to hagel, my first inclination was to give him the benefit of the doubt. i'm for auditing the pentagon. i think there is waste to be found. he's a soldier. served honor bly. i'm starting to have doubts and they are that if you going to run department of de
've covered foreign policy in washington for a long time. can you put this into some kind of perspective, historically? how rare is it for this to happen to a president's nominee? >> well, this is very rare. i mean, it's unprecedented. i covered the john tower nomination. he was the former chairman of the committee of the armed services committee. and that was also something that john mccain brought up yesterday. that's part of the grudge match. he wasn't filibustered because the administration just lost that one. but this filibuster with a recess permits the opposition to keep upping the ante. i mean, one of the things that you and joe are pointing out here is that every time chuck hagel turns a corner, they're flowing something else up there. benghazi wasn't even on his watch. they used it to try to get leverage. to try to get more information about what the president did on that night. did he go to bed? was he calling the pentagon? who was in charge? something that they could have asked in another context. they did get a letter from the white house lawyer yesterday which responded at
him more on every single issue -- the deficit, health care, gun policy, foreign policy, does he have the upper hand? >> i think that the people are looking for results. they're not seeing it now. we have young people graduating from college who -- and the president talks a lot about education. they could find jobs -- i think this is about his tenth time that he's quote pivoting to the economy, and to jobs, but this is like a broken record. he says it, and then goes off to other things. the inaugural address was about climate change, immigration, gun control, gale rights. he ignored the major issue on the minds of the american people, which is jobs and the economy. >> you're not suggesting you think he's going to do that tomorrow? >> i'm hoping he does. i'll have an editorial calling for him to focus on jobs, things he can do to get back to work, but not more borrowing from china and spending. the government doesn't do a very good job of doing that effectively or efficiently. we need people back to work in this country and the president continues to take his eye off that ball and focu
administration. it was very nice of him to bring up foreign policy, because in fact he has not been transparent at all about his drone war or his kill list or any of the other things that have to be leaked for us to find out about. we still don't know what he was doing the night of the attack in benghazi. not just the night of the attack in benghazi but also the night on the attack on the cairo embassy and other embassies in the middle east. if he is transparent, you know, this is sort of basic information that he should provide. >> bret: so you agree that for these senators to say hey, we need this information, it's okay for them to hold up even national security cabinet position for some time to get it. >> the president should be given extreme deference in appointing his members of his cabinet. the way john bolton was treated was terrible. i said that at the time. i think there has to be a real reason. in this situation, i think he will be confirmed but it is sad that lindsey graham has the hold up a nomination to find out where the president was the night of the terrorist attack. i mean some
the president's foreign policy priorities ought to be, looking at response to the turmoil of the arab spring, dealing with russia wouldn't seem to be anyone's natural first priority right now. jenna: one of the arguments, though, for doing this, according to "the new york times," is it would save a lot of money. if we don't have to keep these nuclear weapons and store them and watch them, that's going to save us a lot of cash, and we know the type of financial situation we're in right now. why isn't that a good argument? >> one, everyone would like to save cash, but really we've had $5 trillion added to our national debt over recent years, and maintenance of our nuclear strategic capability contributed nothing to that. and the proposed cuts, they say, would reduce about $120 billion in spending over 20 years, which is really a drop in the wasn't compared -- bucket compared to approaching $20 trillion in national debt. the second is the cut into intellectual capabilities well that should be stimulating economic development, research and development and applied technology. hitting these areas,
very well. that's about him. but do they like the president's foreign policy? no. so these things kind of blend but generally you could say that for national security republicans, these two nominees, brennan on drones, for example, the use of drones, these nominees become proxies for policies they either question or they don't like. >> and moving forward, we're moving into this second term and the kind of makeup of congress is relatively speaking the same. how much do you think this will impact this hold on nominees, impact the relationship between republicans and democrats? it it can't get much worse. >> the white house isn't happy over hagel. they believe it's petty to hold him up when they believe he's going to eventually get confirmed. so they are not happy about it. republicans need to work with the white house on issues like immigration, for example, will this make for bad blood? yes. will it hold up immigration reform if it's in the interest of both parties to do it, probably not. i think the person who gets affected by this, quite honestly, is chuck hagel himself because he's g
the world, senate foreign relations committee. chuck hagel, enlisted man veteran. >> pulled his brother out of a burning vehicle, leaving skardz to his body. these people are not, you know, light-weights. disagree with them on policy basis or whatever you want to say but they are not light-weights. chuck hagel, again, we talked about him a few minutes ago stand-up guy, john kerry, former nominee of his party to be president of the united states. these are not new people or lightweights. but they are not neocohs either. jake calling from eureka,cal. >> i think keeping them on the public airways will ensure the republican parties they are not the best face of the republican party. >> on the domestic side, they are trying to find this new generation, better faces, paul ryans and marco rub yes, sir talking about tupak apparently on interviews now. don't go away. don't go away. i want to hold on because we have something special coming your way a $50 gift certificate for pro-flowers you can use for this valentine's day and the rest of you type in press, you
Search Results 0 to 35 of about 36 (some duplicates have been removed)